Published Online:July 2025
Product Name:The IUP Journal of Law Review
Product Type:Article
Product Code:IUPLR020725
DOI:10.71329/IUPLR/2025.15.3.16-34
Author Name:P Priya Raghavendra and Prachi Singh
Availability:YES
Subject/Domain:Law
Download Format:PDF
Pages:16-34
Insanity defense has long been a subject of debate in both legal and psychological domains, often criticized for its inconsistencies, potential for misuse, and inadequate consideration of victims’ rights. Traditional legal frameworks, such as those based on the M’Naghten Rules, provide a narrow interpretation of insanity, often leading to either an overreliance on psychiatric evaluations or an unjust denial of defense to individuals with genuine mental disorders. This paper seeks to reformulate the insanity defense by integrating it with the right of private defense, particularly through a mental health lens, to ensure a more balanced and just legal approach. It explores the intricate relationship between criminal responsibility, mental health jurisprudence, and self-defense doctrines, highlighting the gaps in current legal standards when dealing with mentally ill defendants who act in perceived self-defense.
Insanity defense has developed over centuries, rooted in the idea that individuals lacking rational intent (mens rea) should not be held criminally responsible. Ancient Greek and Roman laws recognized that mental illness could impair judgment, while medieval societies often attributed insanity to supernatural causes.